[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#304272: marked as done (apache2-common: Why no mod_status?)



Your message dated Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:24:40 -0400
with message-id <20050412022440.GA5505@linux00.LinuxForce.net>
and subject line Bug#304272: Acknowledgement (apache2-common: Why no mod_status?)
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 12 Apr 2005 01:59:20 +0000
>From rradmin@clavin.netlisters.com Mon Apr 11 18:59:20 2005
Return-path: <rradmin@clavin.netlisters.com>
Received: from clavin.netlisters.com [207.8.194.89] 
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1DLAgS-0007dC-00; Mon, 11 Apr 2005 18:59:20 -0700
Received: from rradmin by clavin.netlisters.com with local (Exim 4.50)
	id 1DLAgS-0000Oq-Vt; Mon, 11 Apr 2005 21:59:21 -0400
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 21:59:20 -0400
From: Stephen Gran <steve@linuxforce.net>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Bcc: Steve Gran <steve@lobefin.net>
Subject: apache2-common: Why no mod_status?
Message-ID: <20050412015920.GA1454@clavin.netlisters.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Reportbug-Version: 3.8
X-Editor: VIM - Vi IMproved 6.3 
X-OS: Linux clavin 2.6.8-1-686-smp i686
X-Organization: LinuxForce.net
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i
Sender: Remote Responder System Account <rradmin@clavin.netlisters.com>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE 
	autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level: 

Package: apache2-common
Version: 2.0.53-5
Severity: normal

Hello,

We do some monitoring of apache (munin and others) that rely on the extended
status output only available with mod_status.  Having it missing makes the
output a little unhelpful.  Is there a reason it's not built?

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.8-1-686-smp
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968)

Versions of packages apache2-common depends on:
ii  apache2-utils               2.0.53-5     utility programs for webservers
ii  debconf                     1.4.30.11    Debian configuration management sy
ii  debianutils                 2.8.4        Miscellaneous utilities specific t
ii  libc6                       2.3.2.ds1-20 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii  libdb4.2                    4.2.52-18    Berkeley v4.2 Database Libraries [
ii  libexpat1                   1.95.8-1     XML parsing C library - runtime li
ii  libgcc1                     1:3.4.3-12   GCC support library
ii  libmagic1                   4.12-1       File type determination library us
ii  mime-support                3.28-1       MIME files 'mime.types' & 'mailcap
ii  net-tools                   1.60-10      The NET-3 networking toolkit
ii  openssl                     0.9.7e-3     Secure Socket Layer (SSL) binary a
ii  ssl-cert                    1.0-11       Simple debconf wrapper for openssl

-- no debconf information

-- 
 -----------------------------------------------------------------
|   ,''`.                                            Stephen Gran |
|  : :' :                                    steve@linuxforce.net |
|  `. `'                        Debian user, admin, and developer |
|    `-                                 http://www.linuxforce.net |
 -----------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------
Received: (at 304272-done) by bugs.debian.org; 12 Apr 2005 02:24:42 +0000
>From steve@linux00.linuxforce.net Mon Apr 11 19:24:42 2005
Return-path: <steve@linux00.linuxforce.net>
Received: from gw.linuxforce.net (linux00.LinuxForce.net) [207.106.35.93] 
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1DLB50-0003rW-00; Mon, 11 Apr 2005 19:24:42 -0700
Received: from linux00.LinuxForce.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by linux00.LinuxForce.net (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-7.1) with ESMTP id j3C2OfVq005672
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO)
	for <304272-done@bugs.debian.org>; Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:24:41 -0400
Received: (from steve@localhost)
	by linux00.LinuxForce.net (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-7.1) id j3C2Oe8W005670
	for 304272-done@bugs.debian.org; Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:24:40 -0400
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:24:40 -0400
From: Stephen Gran <sg@linuxforce.net>
To: 304272-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#304272: Acknowledgement (apache2-common: Why no mod_status?)
Message-ID: <20050412022440.GA5505@linux00.LinuxForce.net>
References: <20050412015920.GA1454@clavin.netlisters.com> <handler.304272.B.111327116029385.ack@bugs.debian.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <handler.304272.B.111327116029385.ack@bugs.debian.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
X-Editor: VIM - Vi IMproved 6.1 
X-OS: Linux linux00 2.4.26-2-686-smp i686
X-Uptime: 110 days
X-Date: Today is Sweetmorn, the 28th day of Discord in the YOLD 3171
X-DDate: Only 2431140 Shopping Days Left Before X-Day. Wibble. 
X-Motto: debian/rules
Delivered-To: 304272-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
	autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level: 

Aargh.  Sorry.  I expected to see mod_status as a seperate module, and
was confused about why I could find it.  I see that this is entirely
EBCAK.

shamed, but slightly less confused,
-- 
 -----------------------------------------------------------------
|   ,''`.                                            Stephen Gran |
|  : :' :                                    steve@linuxforce.net |
|  `. `'                        Debian user, admin, and developer |
|    `-                                 http://www.linuxforce.net |
 -----------------------------------------------------------------



Reply to: